Outcry as Australian police search public broadcaster • Hacker News Board

Re: Outcry as Australian police search public broadcaster

#61

Post by xenospn » Wed, Jun 05, 2019, 4:38 PM UTC

Datenstrom wrote: post #49

_jal wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They look different to me. Australia is flexing its anti-speech authority, asserting the power to control what its subjects are allowed to talk about. My hometown cops are engaged in a much more quotidian abuse of power. Which is not to say ransacking Carmody's place wasn't egregious - it was. Watching the circular firing squad composed of the Mayor, the police chief and the cop-union attack dog just leaves me rootin…

> Our cops are criminals I spent a year working as a cop and I can assure you that cops are in fact normal people. Like any organization or group there is a tribal aspect to it and they will certainly close ranks and attempt to protect their own; however, that is organizational not individual. There is a larger cultural issue involved that drives such misguided organizational behavior.

I think the real problem here is that police, as an organization, has the power to inflict real and considerable harm on those that try to "get in the way". They're not doing sanitation or driving your bus - they can ruin your life or just kill you.

Re: Outcry as Australian police search public broadcaster

#62

Post by shooner » Wed, Jun 05, 2019, 4:39 PM UTC

Datenstrom wrote: post #49

_jal wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They look different to me. Australia is flexing its anti-speech authority, asserting the power to control what its subjects are allowed to talk about. My hometown cops are engaged in a much more quotidian abuse of power. Which is not to say ransacking Carmody's place wasn't egregious - it was. Watching the circular firing squad composed of the Mayor, the police chief and the cop-union attack dog just leaves me rootin…

> Our cops are criminals I spent a year working as a cop and I can assure you that cops are in fact normal people. Like any organization or group there is a tribal aspect to it and they will certainly close ranks and attempt to protect their own; however, that is organizational not individual. There is a larger cultural issue involved that drives such misguided organizational behavior.

>they will certainly close ranks and attempt to protect their own; however, that is organizational not individual.

Are you not talking about an organization conspiring to protect law-breakers from justice? Because normal people don't do that.

Re: Outcry as Australian police search public broadcaster

#63

Post by ChrisSD » Wed, Jun 05, 2019, 4:39 PM UTC

Datenstrom wrote: post #49

_jal wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They look different to me. Australia is flexing its anti-speech authority, asserting the power to control what its subjects are allowed to talk about. My hometown cops are engaged in a much more quotidian abuse of power. Which is not to say ransacking Carmody's place wasn't egregious - it was. Watching the circular firing squad composed of the Mayor, the police chief and the cop-union attack dog just leaves me rootin…

> Our cops are criminals I spent a year working as a cop and I can assure you that cops are in fact normal people. Like any organization or group there is a tribal aspect to it and they will certainly close ranks and attempt to protect their own; however, that is organizational not individual. There is a larger cultural issue involved that drives such misguided organizational behavior.

I'm unsure what your point is? You can make the same claims about criminals and indeed many people people do.

Criminals are in fact normal people.

Re: Outcry as Australian police search public broadcaster

#64

Post by minitoar » Wed, Jun 05, 2019, 4:39 PM UTC

Datenstrom wrote: post #49

_jal wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They look different to me. Australia is flexing its anti-speech authority, asserting the power to control what its subjects are allowed to talk about. My hometown cops are engaged in a much more quotidian abuse of power. Which is not to say ransacking Carmody's place wasn't egregious - it was. Watching the circular firing squad composed of the Mayor, the police chief and the cop-union attack dog just leaves me rootin…

> Our cops are criminals I spent a year working as a cop and I can assure you that cops are in fact normal people. Like any organization or group there is a tribal aspect to it and they will certainly close ranks and attempt to protect their own; however, that is organizational not individual. There is a larger cultural issue involved that drives such misguided organizational behavior.

I think you’re actually agreeing with GP. It is the police organization that is criminal as a whole.

Re: Outcry as Australian police search public broadcaster

#65

Post by sonnyblarney » Wed, Jun 05, 2019, 4:41 PM UTC

anonymousDan wrote: post #40

sonnyblarney wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Australia, one of the most open, free and fair places in the world, into which millions are trying to migrate because of this ... is now a 'right wing authoritarian state'? I think we need to look at the specific information in question. FYI here's a summary of Australia shield laws [1] (sorry, it's not very good) [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/07/australia-jour...

Uhm, doctors and medical professionals wanting to expose the rape and abuse of child refugees on Nauru might disagree with you.

Disagree with which part? Exposing illegal activity would seem to be confidently within the bounds of 'whistle blowing'.

Re: Outcry as Australian police search public broadcaster

#66

Post by chrisseaton » Wed, Jun 05, 2019, 4:41 PM UTC

matthewmacleod wrote: post #57

chrisseaton wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't say it stopped them. I know it's possible for them to do it. I said they should stop doing it. It's completely impossible to be even remotely impartial reporting yourself. Isn't that obvious?

No, it’s totally non-obvious to me that this would be the case. It seems frankly ridiculous that you would think they shouldn’t - particularly when there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest partiality in this case. The BBC news organisation often reports on statements or events affecting themselves or other parts of the organisation. Most high-quality news sources do the same. If anything, I’d actually expect them t…

I disagree I’d prefer they recuse themselves, like any other professional with a potential conflict of interest would.

Re: Outcry as Australian police search public broadcaster

#67

Post by r3bl » Wed, Jun 05, 2019, 4:44 PM UTC

chrisseaton wrote: post #53

r3bl wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's because you don't understand what "opinions" are (at least, in this context). News stories should be brief and answer "5W" questions (who, what, when, where, why). As such, they're supposed to be based on the facts alone, and others should draw their own conclusions from them. Opinions, on the other hand, are used to put the news stories into context. Journalists are supposed to have more background to the sto…

Bottom line for me is - I know the BBC have already made up their mind that this is an attack on press freedoms rather than a legitimate investigation, so I’m now not going to be holding my breath for them to report any developments that are contrary to that view. That’s why it’s a shame they choose to do this.

"I came up with this strawman that people close to the situation didn't think of (probably because it isn't even close to being true), so I'm going to hold on my own strawman argument even though I have absolutely nothing to base it on."

There, fixed that for you.

Could it be that you're misinterpreting facts? No, it must be that those who have access to first- and second-hand accounts that are wrong. Not you, a person pulling out a hypothesis based off of less info nor any contact with any of the parties in the story.

Re: Outcry as Australian police search public broadcaster

#68

Post by _bxg1 » Wed, Jun 05, 2019, 4:47 PM UTC

xenospn wrote: post #61

Datenstrom wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Our cops are criminals I spent a year working as a cop and I can assure you that cops are in fact normal people. Like any organization or group there is a tribal aspect to it and they will certainly close ranks and attempt to protect their own; however, that is organizational not individual. There is a larger cultural issue involved that drives such misguided organizational behavior.

I think the real problem here is that police, as an organization, has the power to inflict real and considerable harm on those that try to "get in the way". They're not doing sanitation or driving your bus - they can ruin your life or just kill you.

Agreed. There's an elevated responsibility to be more than just "normal people" when you have a gun and a badge. I don't think it's fair to paint in broad strokes, but I do think it's fair to hold police to a higher standard, especially when it comes to tribalism. When it becomes "us vs them" and "us" has guns and state-sanctioned authority, that's a problem.

Re: Outcry as Australian police search public broadcaster

#69

Post by chrisseaton » Wed, Jun 05, 2019, 4:50 PM UTC

r3bl wrote: post #67

chrisseaton wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bottom line for me is - I know the BBC have already made up their mind that this is an attack on press freedoms rather than a legitimate investigation, so I’m now not going to be holding my breath for them to report any developments that are contrary to that view. That’s why it’s a shame they choose to do this.

"I came up with this strawman that people close to the situation didn't think of (probably because it isn't even close to being true), so I'm going to hold on my own strawman argument even though I have absolutely nothing to base it on." There, fixed that for you. Could it be that you're misinterpreting facts? No, it must be that those who have access to first- and second-hand accounts that are wrong. Not you, a pers…

You’re just being snide and snarky now.

I don’t know why people think it’s extreme to say that I don’t want my public broadcaster quoting their own opinions in the news reports. The article would have been complete without a quote from themselves, or could have used a quote from someone else qualified. Really easy solutions.

Re: Outcry as Australian police search public broadcaster

#70

Post by r3bl » Wed, Jun 05, 2019, 4:52 PM UTC

chrisseaton wrote: post #69

r3bl wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I came up with this strawman that people close to the situation didn't think of (probably because it isn't even close to being true), so I'm going to hold on my own strawman argument even though I have absolutely nothing to base it on." There, fixed that for you. Could it be that you're misinterpreting facts? No, it must be that those who have access to first- and second-hand accounts that are wrong. Not you, a pers…

You’re just being snide and snarky now. I don’t know why people think it’s extreme to say that I don’t want my public broadcaster quoting their own opinions in the news reports. The article would have been complete without a quote from themselves, or could have used a quote from someone else qualified. Really easy solutions.

There's no such thing as unbiased journalism.